An Unhappy Marriage.

Gingernuts wrote:

Booney wrote:Now that those 20 somethings are having kids it's highly unlikely those kids will be interested in the SANFL at all. So while the crowds have clearly been influenced by the AFL sides entering into the competition as they have there has been a massive generational shift from SANFL die hards > little bit of AFL interest > no SANFL interest at all.

This.

This is main contributing factor as to why the SANFL is in steep decline IMO.

Sadly, the AFL reserves seems to have just provided a convenient scapegoat to the parochial die hards (that's not meant in a derogatory way btw) that can't find it within themselves to put their emotional attachments aside and face this cold hard truth.

There would be around 1000-2000 at each SANFL club who would not be able to fathom that the person next to them on the bus doesn't care about the SANFL. 25 years ago, that would have been 8000-10,000 at the bigger clubs. That didn't happen over night.

I think we all know that the advent of the AFL has had this effect. What we don't need is any further blows to the comp to diminish it any further.

Spelly, can you post up the total number of people who attended the matches in the table above for each year please?

ie - 2015 August = 22*2185 - 48,070
1999 = 45,840 etc

Thanks in advance.

Ben W wrote:Are you able to tell us if the said Presidents club voted for or against the AFL sides into the SANFL?

If it's true that only South and Central voted against, then his club voted for.

if the AFL had the best interests of football at heart, firstly they would have an AFL reserves competition & secondly wouldn't have 18 franchises, those 'extra players' playing in those teams drains the standard of the 'state leagues' for one but they should be on lists to make up a reserves side, sadly the AFL is a business & business' are there to make money so they 'invent' extra franchises to get another match on the tv & thus the tv rights for football go up.....

as for the other comments, the $14.00 entry is way too much we've all said it before, it should be $10.00 (it should be ''bums on seats mentality'') & the inclusion of the two franchises into the sanfl have had a big effect on dwindling crowds, i know plenty who have just given up, others go to their teams matches except against the two franchises, for me i still go but the passion isn't as strong as it was before this happened & while i bought my season ticket/membership i have not spent one cent at the Glenelg footy club, not even on match day with food or drink, that is my protest against this situation

I agree with you Ginger in the main .. I believe the introduction of the AFL clubs has been the biggest contributor to the recent drop in crowds, comfortably the biggest contributor.

BUT, every year that passes and more and more kids/young adults that have grown up never having had a connection to a SANFL club, the more the SANFL is going to have to work harder to get new interest. I think the style of football also has a lot to do with it - There are many clubs and many matchups that have boring written all over them for a lot of potential punters these days.

I know I have gone on ad nauseum about the responsibility the AFL has (and this is getting onto a separate topic), and that they appear to consider a professional footballers career over once they've completed their AFL career, but I think the other leagues need to continue to try and alter their mindset.

Australian Rules doesn't have the luxury of other global sports like Basketball, Soccer, Rugby's etc, (even cricket these days) whereby professional players can play for clubs throughout the world, to effectively have a career in their chosen sport. So if a youngster talented in both codes is weighing up his options between Footy and Soccer, Soccer has the following advantages:

- Markedly more $$ available in potential earnings
- National representation
- Thousands of clubs globally to play and earn with
- Can play/earn to an older age

So I would have thought it was in the best interests for the AFL to promote Football careers, irrespective of which level it occurs at, to keep the junior participation levels up (or increase).

Lust looking at a few of the players that fell out of the AFL system last season alone:

James Battersby
Angus Graham
Lewis Johnston
Luke Thompson
Josh Bootsma
Jarryd Cachia
Kane Lucas
Tony Armstrong
(And there were plenty more fitting this criteria)

Why shouldn't they be able to earn say $40k+ per season, in a 2nd flight competition (which keeps them closer to AFL readiness if they become required) if they're good enough? The game has the money, and might even increase revenue opportunities through improved standard in other leagues.

Parents could then consider the industry their child is aspiring to, is bigger than it currently appears at the moment. Surely, SURELY, that has to be in the best interests of the code with the benefits extending to all levels?

I don't understand how this isn't the level of thinking, unless I have missed something (which I'm legitimately happy for someone to point out to me).

spell_check wrote:

So, in the last 19 years there have been only 5 years where more people have gone to SANFL matches, in August.

Yes, more games this year, but doesn't that show that people still go to games? The crowds, on average, are down, but nearly 50,000 people went to an SANFL game this August this year. It can't all be broken?

Thanks Spelly.

Scrunch wrote:
Why shouldn't they be able to earn say $40k+ per season, in a 2nd flight competition (which keeps them closer to AFL readiness if they become required) if they're good enough? The game has the money, and might even increase revenue opportunities through improved standard in other leagues.

The top SANFL players would get $40,000 per year, plus a reasonably comfortable job with flexibility if it's an employer who sponsors the club.

I'd think most SANFL players would get around $12-18000 per year on top of their earning outside of football. If that's $50-60,000 PLUS the $12-18k PLUS the potential for flexibility in the workplace, that's nothing to scoff at, is it?

The SANFL clubs CAN'T afford to increase the salary cap, the only way they could would be to take more money from their local community through poker machines, revenue streams are drying up for SANFL clubs, not flowing freely into their coffers.

Futhermore, to your last part of your comment, I would think the standard of SANFL football by the top 5-6 teams is as good now as it has been for several years. There would be few that deny the AFL sides entry into the SANFL has dropped the standard of play, it has steadily got better and better IMO over the last 3-5 years and has gone to another level this year.

Booney wrote:

Scrunch wrote:
Why shouldn't they be able to earn say $40k+ per season, in a 2nd flight competition (which keeps them closer to AFL readiness if they become required) if they're good enough? The game has the money, and might even increase revenue opportunities through improved standard in other leagues.

The top SANFL players would get $40,000 per year, plus a reasonably comfortable job with flexibility if it's an employer who sponsors the club.

I'd think most SANFL players would get around $12-18000 per year on top of their earning outside of football. If that's $50-60,000 PLUS the $12-18k PLUS the potential for flexibility in the workplace, that's nothing to scoff at, is it?

The SANFL clubs CAN'T afford to increase the salary cap, the only way they could would be to take more money from their local community through poker machines, revenue streams are drying up for SANFL clubs, not flowing freely into their coffers.

Futhermore, to your last part of your comment, I would think the standard of SANFL football by the top 5-6 teams is as good now as it has been for several years. There would be few that deny the AFL sides entry into the SANFL has dropped the standard of play, it has steadily got better and better IMO over the last 3-5 years and has gone to another level this year.

I would think players on $40kpa for football, per club, would be no greater than 2, and less in some circumstances.

Im not scoffing at the figures at all, but Im keeping their other employment out of it - The flexibility is a moot point anyway because some prospective employers won't grant it, ruling some positions of employment out for players.

I think you've missed the point of my comments - In my opinion, the AFL could increase development money, with some of it appearing at league level in Tier 2 leagues (as opposed to purely underage development) and that's where cap increases and improved career opportunity could come from. The SANFL clubs are at their limit, would never suggest additional financial burden on them.

Many will see this as handout requests for lesser leagues - I truly don't see it that way. The fact is the other leagues need help, and that help benefits (or could) the code at the highest level. IF the AFL continue to ignore it, you watch them squeal when Soccer hits full tilt in this country (OK, won't happen in our time, but it will happen) and the participation rates and talent drop markedly. All because they put their own competition ahead of the code itself.

(I would still question the standard too - Personally I still find it entertaining, but believe the standard has dropped every few years since the mid-late 90's)

Booney wrote:

spell_check wrote:

So, in the last 19 years there have been only 5 years where more people have gone to SANFL matches, in August.

Yes, more games this year, but doesn't that show that people still go to games? The crowds, on average, are down, but nearly 50,000 people went to an SANFL game this August this year. It can't all be broken?

Thanks Spelly.

I knew that's what you were looking for...and in times past one team did not play each week (who had the bye), so that's say at least 4000-6000 (up to 5 rounds worth) less each year prior to 2014.

An interesting article .... http://www.fansunite.com.au/2015/09/21/20683/time-for-the-sanfl-clubs-to-grow-up

He seems to completely ignore a couple of inconvenient truths, such as the fact that Centrals, while dominant, were still competing on the same level playing field as the other clubs; and that the SANFL propped Port up to the tune of $13million which Port do not have to pay back.

firstblood wrote:An interesting article .... http://www.fansunite.com.au/2015/09/21/20683/time-for-the-sanfl-clubs-to-grow-up

Frankly I thought it was just a bit of s..t stirring. If his intention was to attract sympathy for Port, it failed dismally. More likely to raise the level of angst in what is already, as the title of the thread indicates, a very unhappy marriage.

Let's not have one Port supporter speak for all. Thanks.